I never have read quote that JO said "I would want to go play in Los Angelas with kobe"
he WANTS to go to LA? wtf...

indyman37

06-14-2007, 11:34 PM

yipee! we are trying to get them to take Murphy!

BlueNGold

06-14-2007, 11:34 PM

That article sounds very real.

A fair deal with the Lakers will be Odom or Bynum but not both because they need one of those guys to make a run. They sacrifice their young talent and pick and give up Brown's contract expy. That's the trade off. Youth for experience. If the Pacers demand Odom, Bynum, Brown the #19 and filler for JO and Murphy, they get a steal and LA is left with Kobe, JO and garbage.

Kobe will be traded or the Lakers will go in another direction (Artest or Camby)...if the Pacers do not budge.

BlueNGold

06-14-2007, 11:35 PM

yipee! we are trying to get them to take Murphy!

The problem is, we will likely get Radman to match contracts.

indyman37

06-14-2007, 11:42 PM

The problem is, we will likely get Radman to match contracts.
Naw, I meant on the trade they mentioned in the article...JO/Murphy for Odom/Bynum/Kwame. I wonder if the 19th would still be included?

Edit: Now I see your point...without Odom being in the trade we would need Vladmir right?

Smashed_Potato

06-14-2007, 11:46 PM

That article sounds very real.

A fair deal with the Lakers will be Odom or Bynum but not both because they need one of those guys to make a run. They sacrifice their young talent and pick and give up Brown's contract expy. That's the trade off. Youth for experience. If the Pacers demand Odom, Bynum, Brown the #19 and filler for JO and Murphy, they get a steal and LA is left with Kobe, JO and garbage.

Kobe will be traded or the Lakers will go in another direction (Artest or Camby)...if the Pacers do not budge.

Eventually i think the Pacers will budge with Bynum included as the only major piece.

indyman37

06-14-2007, 11:48 PM

Eventually i think the Pacers will budge with Bynum included as the only major piece.
Well, on the bright side, I would rather have Bynum than Odom anyways.

Y2J

06-14-2007, 11:57 PM

I'd do it without Odom, but I'd wanna dump a contract and get back an extra 1st if that were the case. Unfortunately, the salaries make that all but impossible.

avoidingtheclowns

06-14-2007, 11:58 PM

Eventually i think the Pacers will budge with Bynum included as the only major piece.

i'm struggling to see why the pacers would budge... we don't have to make a trade, it'd be nice, sure but why would we budge if thats our asking price?

PacerFan31

06-15-2007, 12:02 AM

Eventually i think the Pacers will budge with Bynum included as the only major piece.

Sounds like wishful thinking to me.

Why would the Pacers budge when we don't have to trade JO, or could easily go elsewhere and more than likely get a better offer for him?

Shade

06-15-2007, 12:02 AM

Eventually i think the Pacers will budge with Bynum included as the only major piece.

If they do, I'll be ready for TPTB to leave.

Smashed_Potato

06-15-2007, 12:05 AM

Walsh desires Bynum more then Odom.

somehow i think it can work out i guess we'll see.

OnlyPacersLeft

06-15-2007, 12:11 AM

with so much contract money on our cap...we might as well keep JO and just hell let em walk if we arent competitive in 2 years...F it...

diamonddave00

06-15-2007, 12:42 AM

If we got them to take JO and Murphy we'd have to give up something else. Walsh/Bird can't really expect to dump 106 mil in contracts off in exchange for 46 million can they?

More likely we'd have to take Radmanovic , his contract is distasteful but would be 17 mil cheaper than Murphy over the next 4 years. Not sure what else we'd send to the Lakers to complete a deal.

beast23

06-15-2007, 01:04 AM

I think you guys are totally off your rockers if you believe that a deal without Odom would yield a "fair" deal. Bynum + Kwame + #19 + crap is not worth Jermaine and Murphy. No how, no way.

We may not end up being a participant in the draft, but we can sure as hell make a better deal than this.

I think you guys are missing the point. We may need to trade Jermaine prior to the end of the coming season for the simple reason that we may lose him for nothing if he opts out of his contract following the season. But there is NOTHING forcing us to take the first deal that comes along.

On the other hand, the Laker's time is much more narrow. They absolutely have to acquire quality players to appease Kobe or Kobe will probably follow through on his threat to demand a trade. In other words, they either find a decent player quickly or they get rid of Kobe.

Now, I would ask... Who's under the more immediate pressure, the Lakers or the Pacers? Obviously the answer is the Lakers.

So, no matter how you dice it, the Pacers probably have the upper hand in the negotiations. That doesn't mean the Lakers won't look elsewhere, they probably already are.

But to best appease Kobe, there is probably only one other player that has as much appeal as Jermaine. And from everything the 'Wolves are saying, Garnett is not on the market.

So make no mistake about it. The Pacers are the most desirable trading partner for the Lakers. They know it... and we know it. That doesn't mean that the Lakers won't hold firm and come up with some other trade and try to spin it to Kobe. But they won't do so without coming back for a final attempt at Jermaine first. And that's when either they blink or we have a pretty tough decision to make. And that time hasn't arrived. Not yet anyway.... probably not until about the 27th.

So, unless the Lakers do blink very quickly, we have nearly another 2 weeks of this crap to put up with.

And if we do panic and cry uncle well before that time, then I think Donnie and Larry should be lined up against the nearest wall and very expediently put out of their misery. Or our misery, depending on your perspective.

Smashed_Potato

06-15-2007, 01:16 AM

Beast it's logical. someone is gonna bite the offer and there is a good chance the Pacers are the ones who are gonna bite. and I'm not saying that because I'm a Laker fan but as the draft gets closer they will get what there offered which is a Odom deal without Bynum or a Bynum deal without Odom.

avoidingtheclowns

06-15-2007, 01:22 AM

Walsh desires Bynum more then Odom.

somehow i think it can work out i guess we'll see.

see thats the problem, theres no reason to work it out if we're not getting the best value. we might as well keep JO and let you try to get another big man to play with kobe. at least we know what we have, with bynum who knows. kobe obviously doesn't want to play with him. phil has questioned his work ethic. yes walsh desires bynum because he's a prospect, but he desires odom because odom is actually worth something more tangible than hope.

besides... if we're talking about a stare-down, you can't tell me mitch will beat ol' bugeyes

http://www.nba.com/media/pacers/walsh_240_desk.jpg

Will Galen

06-15-2007, 03:59 AM

If we got them to take JO and Murphy we'd have to give up something else. Walsh/Bird can't really expect to dump 106 mil in contracts off in exchange for 46 million can they?

Comparing total money in deals is an overrated stat.

For instant, say we do a sign and trade next year for JO. We sign him to a 5 year $100 million contract, and then trade him for two players each with $10 million expiring contracts. That's $100 Million for $20 million.

However, what will the Pacers do when those two $10 million dollar contracts expire? They will sign other players. In other words both the Pacers and the other team are still going to be paying out about $65 million a year in contracts.

I think you guys are missing the point. We may need to trade Jermaine prior to the end of the coming season for the simple reason that we may lose him for nothing if he opts out of his contract following the season.

I'm not picking on you it's just I keep reading this. How we going to lose JO for nothing? He'll be making $20 million a year. What team will get $20 million under the cap? None!

JO would have to take a humongous cut in salary for us to lose him for nothing. Something like 8 to 10 million a year. Won't happen.

Will Galen

06-15-2007, 04:01 AM

Beast it's logical. someone is gonna bite the offer and there is a good chance the Pacers are the ones who are gonna bite. and I'm not saying that because I'm a Laker fan but as the draft gets closer they will get what there offered which is a Odom deal without Bynum or a Bynum deal without Odom.

The Pacers will simply take the 3rd option, NO DEAL.

Will Galen

06-15-2007, 04:09 AM

see thats the problem, theres no reason to work it out if we're not getting the best value. we might as well keep JO and let you try to get another big man to play with kobe. at least we know what we have, with bynum who knows. kobe obviously doesn't want to play with him. phil has questioned his work ethic. yes walsh desires bynum because he's a prospect, but he desires odom because odom is actually worth something more tangible than hope.

EXACTLY!

The reason we want to do the deal is Bynum, but all he is is a prospect. We wouldn't trade JO for him even up. We want value for JO, and Odom has some value. Everything else is just filler.

DaSMASH

06-15-2007, 09:24 AM

Beast it's logical. someone is gonna bite the offer and there is a good chance the Pacers are the ones who are gonna bite. and I'm not saying that because I'm a Laker fan but as the draft gets closer they will get what there offered which is a Odom deal without Bynum or a Bynum deal without Odom.

Sometimes standing pat is the right thing to do.

The PAcers have too much riding to come out without the people they want, especially since they have the one up's man ship of Kobes big mouth to work behind.:dance:

Unclebuck

06-15-2007, 09:30 AM

The thing most of you don't realize is how good Odom really is. If the Pacers trade for him he immediately becomes our best player - without question. I still want Bynum obviously, but if we get rid of Murphy - I might be willing to negotiate

RomanGabriel

06-15-2007, 09:39 AM

The thing most of you don't realize is how good Odom really is. If the Pacers trade for him he immediately becomes our best player - without question. I still want Bynum obviously, but if we get rid of Murphy - I might be willing to negotiate
Exactly. Lamar Odom is not just filler - he's just a slight notch below JO. Now it's another question if we'd use him in another deal, but LA is giving up a helluva lot with Odom and Bynum.

Cobol Sam

06-15-2007, 09:43 AM

Forgive me for speculating, but why not return one of our young talents to sweeten the deal?

Diogu and\or Harrison maybe.

Anthem

06-15-2007, 09:45 AM

Forgive me for speculating, but why not return one of our young talents to sweeten the deal?

Diogu and\or Harrison maybe.
Harrison and Greene, who'd be a strong PG in the triangle.

DaSMASH

06-15-2007, 09:46 AM

The thing most of you don't realize is how good Odom really is. If the Pacers trade for him he immediately becomes our best player - without question. I still want Bynum obviously, but if we get rid of Murphy - I might be willing to negotiate

I totally agree with you!

Odom is not a player that you trade again once you get him here, he's a player that you build a team around. If he knows he's the man here in Indy, then he'll come off of the "I don't want to go to Indy stance". Thats something that the PAcers can and will take care of by either extending his current or tearing up his current and redoing. Bynum is all upside talent, the question is when will that upside get here. The Lakers have been waiting 3 years, O'Neal took 4 years from when he was in Portland. The only difference is that the team ( 96-2000 Blazers) Jermaine got to practice with is much different then the team that Bynum practices and learns from. Still the Lakers made a mistake not parting with Bynum for Kidd when they had the chance. They won't make that same mistake twice.

In the long run the Pacers will get what they want and the Lakers will be more competitive with O'Neal then without.

Moses

06-15-2007, 09:50 AM

Beast it's logical. someone is gonna bite the offer and there is a good chance the Pacers are the ones who are gonna bite. and I'm not saying that because I'm a Laker fan but as the draft gets closer they will get what there offered which is a Odom deal without Bynum or a Bynum deal without Odom.
This is a pretty funny statement.

So the pacers..who really don't have a ton of incentive to trade JO are going to take a crappy deal from the Lakers who are desperate for a trade to make Kobe happy? I think you've got it backwards.

Ragnar

06-15-2007, 09:56 AM

Man I hated this trade so far but a chance to dump Murphy!!!! I don't want to see J.O. go but Bynum would be nice. A draft pick would also be nice.

avoidingtheclowns

06-15-2007, 10:04 AM

The thing most of you don't realize is how good Odom really is. If the Pacers trade for him he immediately becomes our best player - without question. I still want Bynum obviously, but if we get rid of Murphy - I might be willing to negotiate

i'm not denying odom's talent. but i don't think you bring him here to build around for the future. he, like jermaine, has probably hit his ceiling and especially with his injury history doesn't seem like the type of player you should be building around for the future. like most of us have come to realize jermaine isn't a fantastic #1 offensive option, so too can be said for lamar, otherwise he and kobe would probably be getting it done in LA. i think it is very important to get lamar because of future value AS WELL AS while our young talent/prospects are growing (granger, shawne, quis, bynum, ike) we have a #1 option the team can defer to - otherwise danny or quis becomes the #1 and i don't think thats the best idea.

odom is a short-term answer, but i seriously doubt he is a long term player to build around. his exp. contract the following season will be attractive.

NuffSaid

06-15-2007, 10:10 AM

I, for one, can understand why Pacers mgmt wouldn't budge. In the final analysis, Odom isn't quiet on the same level as JO and Bynum is still an up-and-coming young talent. I still don't understand the inclusion of Kwame in the trade proposal, but for my take the trade really doesn't work.

Yes, Odom would become our 1st option big man, but I don't think he's as good as JO. As for Bynum, I'd say he's about on par w/Ike. So, there's yet another prospect to develop. Do we really want to go through that?

My vote is to keep JO and forget about the "what if's" as far as whether or not he opts out this year, next year...whenever. If things go the way I hope they will for next season w/JO still in a Pacers uniform, TPTB won't have to worry about JO opting out. He'll be very content with the team's improvement and the direction they're going, and it won't matter anymore.

Slick Pinkham

06-15-2007, 10:17 AM

Personally I'd much rather keep Murphy than keep Tinsley.

That may not be a popular view, but I think the pretty serious early season achilles injury to Murphy and the Carlisle offense contributed to his ultra-lame performance last year. He will never be worth his contract, but if healthy I think O'Brien will use him much more effectively.

Of course Tinsley is the worst possible fit for the triangle offense and cannot play defense to suit Phil Jackson, so I hope a three-way deal works out where JT can be dumped somewhere else.

Unclebuck

06-15-2007, 10:22 AM

Personally I'd much rather keep Murphy than keep Tinsley.

That may not be a popular view, but I think the pretty serious early season achilles injury to Murphy and the Carlisle offense contributed to his ultra-lame performance last year. He will never be worth his contract, but if healthy I think O'Brien will use him much more effectively.

Of course Tinsley is the worst possible fit for the triangle offense and cannot play defense to suit Phil Jackson, so I hope a three-way deal works out where JT can be dumped somewhere else.

I agree with you on all accounts. Especially the part about the Lakers not wanting Tinsley - it is just a horrible fit

diamonddave00

06-15-2007, 10:44 AM

Compromise let the Lakers keep Kwame Brown's contract.

In order to unload Troy Murphy's deal the Pacers accept Radmanovic and Mo Evans instead of Brown -still saves almost 16 million over the next 4 years.

Lakers would still send Bynum and Odom here with Rad and Evans for JO and Murphy. Saves 7 mil next season and 10 mil the following season. At that point Odom's deal is up .

Its not the cap space dream of Brown and no Radmanovic but it could save over 40 million if Odom is not resigned.

The ONLY compromise that there will be is that the Lakers are stuck with Kobe's byotching and No Jermaine O'Neal.

The Pacers will win this staredown easily.

NapTonius Monk

06-15-2007, 11:00 AM

see thats the problem, theres no reason to work it out if we're not getting the best value. we might as well keep JO and let you try to get another big man to play with kobe. at least we know what we have, with bynum who knows. kobe obviously doesn't want to play with him. phil has questioned his work ethic. yes walsh desires bynum because he's a prospect, but he desires odom because odom is actually worth something more tangible than hope.

besides... if we're talking about a stare-down, you can't tell me mitch will beat ol' bugeyes

http://www.nba.com/media/pacers/walsh_240_desk.jpg That was terrific!

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :rotflmao::laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

indyman37

06-15-2007, 11:03 AM

Compromise let the Lakers keep Kwame Brown's contract.

In order to unload Troy Murphy's deal the Pacers accept Radmanovic and Mo Evans instead of Brown -still saves almost 16 million over the next 4 years.

Lakers would still send Bynum and Odom here with Rad and Evans for JO and Murphy. Saves 7 mil next season and 10 mil the following season. At that point Odom's deal is up .

Its not the cap space dream of Brown and no Radmanovic but it could save over 40 million if Odom is not resigned.
The more I think about the Lakers keeping Kwame the more I think they would prefer to do that type of trade. They get to keep one of their better frontcourt players and he would be with Murphy and JO. That would be a pretty decent frontcourt in my mind. But another thing is that Kwame has an expiring contract. If the Lakers don't trade him they can just not resign him after this season and use the money for someone else, that is if they don't want to keep Kwame.

naptown

06-15-2007, 12:04 PM

If Kwame is a sticking point for the Lakers, it is because they want to use him to acquire another player to help them win now. Not because they plan to keep him this year.

The reason the Lakers are balking at this is because the Pacers would be taking all of their truly tradeable assets.